2.1 Cancer Therapy
Cancer is one of the most significant health conditions. The American Cancer Society's Cancer Facts and Figures, 2003, predicts over 1.3 million Americans will receive a cancer diagnosis this year. In the United States, cancer is second only to heart disease in mortality accounting for one of four deaths. In 2002, the National Institutes of Health estimated total costs of cancer totaled $171.6 billion, with $61 billion in direct expenditures. The incidence of cancer is widely expected to increase as the US population ages, further augmenting the impact of this condition. The current treatment regimens for cancer established in the 1970s and 1980s, have not changed dramatically. These treatments, which include chemotherapy, radiation and other modalities including newer targeted therapies, have shown limited overall survival benefit when utilized in most advanced stage common cancers since, among other things, these therapies primarily target tumor bulk.
More specifically, conventional cancer diagnosis and therapies to date have attempted to selectively detect and eradicate neoplastic cells that are largely fast-growing (i.e., cells that form the tumor bulk). Standard oncology regimens have often been largely designed to administer the highest dose of irradiation or a chemotherapeutic agent without undue toxicity, i.e., often referred to as the “maximum tolerated dose” (MTD) or “no observed adverse effect level” (NOAEL). Many conventional cancer chemotherapies (e.g., alkylating agents such as cyclophosphamide, antimetabolites such as 5-Fluorouracil, and plant alkaloids such as vincristine) and conventional irradiation therapies exert their toxic effects on cancer cells largely by interfering with cellular mechanisms involved in cell growth and DNA replication. Chemotherapy protocols also often involve administration of a combination of chemotherapeutic agents in an attempt to increase the efficacy of treatment. Despite the availability of a large variety of chemotherapeutic agents, these therapies have many drawbacks (see, e.g., Stockdale, 1998, “Principles Of Cancer Patient Management” in Scientific American Medicine, vol. 3, Rubenstein and Federman, eds., ch. 12, sect. X). For example, chemotherapeutic agents are notoriously toxic due to non-specific side effects on fast-growing cells whether normal or malignant; e.g. chemotherapeutic agents cause significant, and often dangerous, side effects, including bone marrow depression, immunosuppression, and gastrointestinal distress, etc.
Other types of traditional cancer therapies include surgery, hormonal therapy, immunotherapy, anti-angiogenesis therapy, targeted therapy (e.g., therapy directed to a cancer target such as Gleevec® and other tyrosine kinase inhibitors, Velcade®, Sutent®, et al.), and radiation treatment to eradicate neoplastic cells in a patient (see, e.g., Stockdale, 1998, “Principles of Cancer Patient Management,” in Scientific American: Medicine, vol. 3, Rubenstein and Federman, eds., ch. 12, sect. IV). All of these approaches can pose significant drawbacks for the patient including a lack of efficacy (in terms of long-term outcome (e.g. due to failure to target cancer stem cells) and toxicity (e.g. due to non-specific effects on normal tissues)). Accordingly, new therapies for improving the long-term prospect of cancer patients are needed.
2.2 Cancer Stem Cells
Cancer stem cells comprise a unique subpopulation (often 0.1-10% or so) of a tumor that, relative to the remaining 90% or so of the tumor (i.e., the tumor bulk), are more tumorigenic, relatively more slow-growing or quiescent, and often relatively more chemoresistant than the tumor bulk. Given that conventional therapies and regimens have, in large part, been designed to attack rapidly proliferating cells (i.e. those cancer cells that comprise the tumor bulk), cancer stem cells which are often slow-growing may be relatively more resistant than faster growing tumor bulk to conventional therapies and regimens. Cancer stem cells can express other features which make them relatively chemoresistant such as multi-drug resistance and anti-apoptotic pathways. The aforementioned would constitute a key reason for the failure of standard oncology treatment regimens to ensure long-term benefit in most patients with advanced stage cancers—i.e. the failure to adequately target and eradicate cancer stem cells. In some instances, a cancer stem cell(s) is the founder cell of a tumor (i.e., it is the progenitor of the cancer cells that comprise the tumor bulk).
Cancer stem cells have been identified in a large variety of cancer types. For instance, Bonnet et al., using flow cytometry were able to isolate the leukemia cells bearing the specific phenotype CD34+ CD38−, and subsequently demonstrate that it is these cells (comprising <1% of a given leukemia), unlike the remaining 99+% of the leukemia bulk, that are able to recapitulate the leukemia from whenst it was derived when transferred into immunodeficient mice. See, e.g., “Human acute myeloid leukemia is organized as a hierarchy that originates from a primitive hematopoietic cell,” Nat. Med. 3:730-737 (1997). That is, these cancer stem cells were found as <1 in 10,000 leukemia cells yet this low frequency population was able to initiate and serially transfer a human leukemia into severe combined immunodeficiency/non-obese diabetic (NOD/SCID) mice with the same histologic phenotype as in the original tumor.
Cox et al. identified small subfractions of human acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) cells which had the phenotypes CD34+/CD10− and CD34+/CD19−, and were capable of engrafting ALL tumors in immunocompromised mice—i.e. the cancer stem cells. In contrast, no engraftment of the mice was observed using the ALL bulk, despite, in some cases, injecting 10-fold more cells. See Cox et al., “Characterization of acute lymphoblastic leukemia progenitor cells,” Blood 104(19): 2919-2925 (2004).
Multiple myeloma was found to contain small subpopulations of cells that were CD138− and, relative to the large bulk population of CD138+ myeloma cells, had greater clonogenic and tumorigenic potential. See Matsui et al., “Characterization of clonogenic multiple myeloma cells,” Blood 103(6): 2332. The authors concluded that the CD138− subpopulation of multiple myeloma was the cancer stem cell population.
Kondo et al. isolated a small population of cells from a C6-glioma cell line, which was identified as the cancer stem cell population by virtue of its ability to self-renew and recapitulate gliomas in immunocompromised mice. See Kondo et al., “Persistence of a small population of cancer stem-like cells in the C6 glioma cell line,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 101:781-786 (2004). In this study, Kondo et al. determined that cancer cell lines contain a population of cancer stem cells that confer the ability of the line to engraft immunodeficient mice.
Breast cancers were shown to contain a small population of cells with stem cell characteristics (bearing surface markers CD44+CD24low lin−). See Al-Hajj et al., “Prospective identification of tumorigenic breast cancer cells,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 100:3983-3988 (2003). As few as 200 of these cells, corresponding to 1-10% of the total tumor cell population, are able to form tumors in NOD/SCID mice. In contrast, implantation of 20,000 cells that lacked this phenotype (i.e. the tumor bulk) was unable to re-grow the tumor.
A subpopulation of cells derived from human prostate tumors was found to self-renew and to recapitulate the phenotype of the prostate tumor from which they were derived thereby constituting the prostate cancer stem cell population. See Collins et al., “Prospective Identification of Tumorigenic Prostate Cancer Stem Cells,” Cancer Res 65(23):10946-10951 (2005).
Fang et al. isolated a subpopulation of cells from melanoma with cancer stem cell properties. In particular, this subpopulation of cells could differentiate and self-renew. In culture, the subpopulation formed spheres whereas the more differentiated cell fraction from the lesions were more adherent. Moreover, the subpopulation containing sphere-like cells were more tumorigenic than the adherent cells when grafted into mice. See Fang et al., “A Tumorigenic Subpopulation with Stem Cell Properties in Melanomas,” Cancer Res 65(20): 9328-9337 (2005).
Singh et al. identified brain tumor stem cells. When isolated and transplanted into nude mice, the CD133+ cancer stem cells, unlike the CD133− tumor bulk cells, form tumors that can then be serially transplanted. See Singh et al., “Identification of human brain tumor initiating cells,” Nature 432:396-401 (2004); Singh et al., “Cancer stem cells in nervous system tumors,” Oncogene 23:7267-7273 (2004); Singh et al., “Identification of a cancer stem cell in human brain tumors,” Cancer Res. 63:5821-5828 (2003).
Since conventional cancer therapies target rapidly proliferating cells (i.e., cells that form the tumor bulk) these treatments are believed to be relatively ineffective at targeting and impairing cancer stem cells. In fact, cancer stem cells, including leukemia stem cells, have indeed been shown to be relatively resistant to conventional chemotherapeutic therapies (e.g. Ara-C, daunorubicin) as well as newer targeted therapies (e.g. Gleevec®, Velcade®). Examples of cancer stem cells from various tumors that are resistant to chemotherapy, and the mechanism by which they are resistant, are described in Table 1 below.
TABLE 1CSC TypeResistanceMechanismReferenceAMLAra-CQuiescenceGuzman. Blood ′01AMLDaunorubicinDrug Efflux, Anti-Costello. CancerapoptosisRes ′00AMLDaunorubicin,Drug EffluxWulf. Blood ′01mitoxantroneAMLQuiescenceGuan. Blood ′03AML, MDSAnti-apoptosisSuarez. Clin CancerRes ′04CMLQuiescenceHolyoake. Blood ′99CMLGleevec ®QuiescenceGraham. Blood ′02MyelomaVelcade ®Matsui. ASH 04For example, leukemic stem cells are relatively slow-growing or quiescent, express multi-drug resistance genes, and utilize other anti-apoptotic mechanisms—features which contribute to their chemoresistance. See Jordan et al., “Targeting the most critical cells: approaching leukemia therapy as a problem in stem cell biology,” Nat. Clin. Pract. Oncol. 2: 224-225 (2005). Further, cancer stem cells by virtue of their chemoresistance may contribute to treatment failure, and may also persist in a patient after clinical remission and these remaining cancer stem cells may therefore contribute to relapse at a later date. See Behbood et al., “Will cancer stem cells provide new therapeutic targets?” Carcinogenesis 26(4): 703-711 (2004). Therefore, targeting cancer stem cells is expected to provide for improved long-term outcomes for cancer patients. Accordingly, new therapeutic agents and/or regimens designed to target cancer stem cells are needed to reach this goal.2.3 Acute Myeloid Leukemia
Approximately forty thousand patients per year develop acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in the U.S., Canada, and Europe. See, e.g., Jamal et al., Cancer Statisitics 56:106-130 (2006). AML is the most common leukemia in adults and the second most common leukemia in children. The prolonged hospitalizations associated with treatment and complications represent a significant share of health care costs in these regions. Further, even with combination induction and consolidation chemotherapy, most patients ultimately relapse and die from their disease or complications of treatment. See, e.g., Brune et al., “Improved leukemia-free survival after post-consolidation immunotherapy with histamine dihydrochloride and interleukin-2 in acute myeloid leukemia: results of a randomized phase III trial,” Blood 108(1):88-96 (2006). Novel therapies are urgently needed. Selective targeting of AML cells stem cells may provide a safe and more effective therapy.
2.4 Myelodysplastic Syndrome
There are approximately 20,000 new cases of myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) each year in the U.S. Patients with myelodysplastic syndromes typically have low blood cell counts in at least one or more of red blood cells, white blood cells, and platelets. Upon examination, the bone marrow usually is found to be dysplastic or hyperplastic, meaning there are too many poorly functioning blood stem cells in the marrow. A small percentage of MDS patients have hypoplastic bone marrow, meaning there are too few blood stem cells in the marrow, which make the disease look similar to aplastic anemia. Nearly half of people with MDS have no symptoms at time of diagnosis. When signs and symptoms do occur they can include anemia, weakness, fatigue, headache, bruising, increased bleeding, rash, fevers, mouth sores and lingering illness. MDS occurs at an increasing frequency in older people, but it can occur in children too. In less than a third of patients, MDS progresses over time to become acute leukemia. The average age of diagnosis is 70 years old. Treatments for MDS may vary considerably, depending on the type of MDS, the history of the patient, and the age and ability to tolerate certain treatment regimens. Treatment options include supportive care, chemotherapy-related agents, and stem cell transplantation (which is typically used only in patients under 50). However, the remission rate for existing treatments in relatively low, and new therapies are needed.
2.5 Interleukin-3
Interleukin-3 (IL-3) is a cytokine that supports the proliferation and differentiation of multi-potential and committed myeloid and lymphoid progenitors. See, e.g., Nitsche et al. “Interleukin-3 promotes proliferation and differentiation of human hematopoietic stem cells but reduces their repopulation potential in NOD/SCID mice,” Stem Cells 21: 236-244 (2003). Human interleukin-3 mediates its effects by binding to human IL-3 receptor, which is a hetrodimeric structure and consists of an IL-3 binding α-subunit and a β-subunit. The α subunit is essential for ligand binding and confers specificity on the receptor. The β subunit is also shared by the granulocyte macrophage-colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF) and IL-5 receptors, and is required for high affinity ligand binding and signal transduction. Binding of IL-3 induces the heterodimerization of the α- and β-receptor subunits. The IL-3 receptor is over-expressed, relative to certain normal hematopoietic cells, on multiple hematological cancers including AML, B cell acute lymphocytic leukemia (B-ALL), hairy cell leukemia, Hodgkin's disease, and certain aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphomas (Munoz. Haematologica 86:1261-1269, 2001; Riccioni. Leuk Lymphoma 46:303-311, 2005; Testa. Leukemia 18:219-226, 2004), as well as on the cancer stem cells of AML, myelodsyplastic syndrome (MDS), T cell ALL (T-ALL), and chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) (See Jordan et al. “The interleukin-3 receptor alpha chain is a unique marker for human acute myelogenous leukemia stem cells,” Leukemia 14:1777-1784 (2000); Florian et al. “Detection of molecular targets on the surface of CD34+/CD38− stem cells in various myeloid malignancies,” Leuk. Lymphoma 47:207-222 (2006); Lhermitte et al. “Most immature T-ALLs express Ra-IL3 (CD123): possible target for DT-IL3# therapy,” 20:1908-1910 (2006); and Hogge et al. “Variant Diphtheria Toxin-Interleukin-3 Conjugates with Increased Receptor Affinity Have Enhanced Cytotoxicity against Acute Myeloid Leukemia Progenitors,” Clin. Caner Res. 12:1284-1291 (2004).
2.6 Diphtheria Toxin
Diphtheria toxin (DT) is a 535 amino acid protein with three domains consisting of a catalytic domain (amino acids 1-186) connected by an arginine-rich disulfide loop to a translocation domain (amino acids 187-388) and a cell binding domain (amino acids 389-535; FIG. 1). See, e.g., Choe et al., “The crystal structure of diphtheria toxin,” Nature 357: 216-222 (1992). Native DT binds to heparin-binding epidermal growth factor precursor and CD9 on the cell surface, undergoes clathrin-, dynamin- and ATP-dependent receptor-mediated endocytosis and, with endosome acidification by vesicular ATPase, the DT translocation domain undergoes protonation of acidic residues and spontaneous insertion into the vesicular membrane to form 18-22 Angstrom channels. The catalytic domain unfolds and is cleaved by furin in the vesicle and then the C-terminus of the catalytic domain transfers through the channel and binds to coatomer proteins, specifically β-COP. Protein disulfide isomerase reduces the linkage of the catalytic domain with the remainder of DT and the peptide passes into the cytosol. Hsp90 assists in refolding. The DT fragment then ADP-ribosylates elongation factor 2 leading to protein synthesis inactivation and cell death (FIG. 2). See Ratts et al., “A conserved motif in transmembrane helix 1 of diphtheria toxin mediates catalytic domain delivery to the cytosol,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 102: 15635-15640 (2005).
2.7 Recombinant Diphtheria Toxin Conjugates
Recombinant protein-toxin conjugates represent a novel class of oncology biological agents that specifically target receptors on the surfaces of cancer cells. These agents typically consist of a truncated toxin, often including the catalytic and translocation (but not cell binding) domains, fused to a cell selective ligand which directs the toxin to the intended target. One such technology involves the recombinant diphtheria toxin (DT). DT is a 535 amino acid protein with three domains consisting of a catalytic domain (amino acids 1-186) connected by an arginine-rich disulfide loop to a translocation domain (amino acids 187-388) and a cell binding domain (amino acids 389-535; FIG. 1). See, e.g., Choe et al., “The crystal structure of diphtheria toxin”, Nature. 357: 216-222 (1992). Native DT binds to heparin-binding epidermal growth factor precursor and CD9 on the cell surface, undergoes clathrin-, dynamin- and ATP-dependent receptor-mediated endocytosis, and, with endosome acidification by vesicular ATPase, the DT translocation domain undergoes protonation of acidic residues and spontaneous insertion into the vesicular membrane to form 18-22 Angstrom channels. The catalytic domain unfolds and is cleaved by furin in the vesicle and then the C-terminus of the catalytic domain transfers through the channel and binds β-COP. Protein disulfide isomerase reduces the linkage of the catalytic domain with the remainder of DT and the peptide passes into the cytosol. Hsp90 assists in refolding. The DT fragment then ADP-ribosylates elongation factor 2 leading to protein synthesis inactivation and cell death (FIG. 2). See Ratts et al., “A conserved motif in transmembrane helix 1 of diphtheria toxin mediates catalytic domain delivery to the cytosol” Proc Natl Acad Sci., 102: 15635-15640 (2005). A number of recombinant DT conjugates, utilizing a truncated form of DT, have been expressed, purified, and tested in cell culture and selective cell toxicity has been shown. One such recombinant toxin is the DT388IL-3 conjugate, wherein the truncated DT maintains its catalytic and translocation, but not its cell binding domain.
DT388IL-3 was constructed by fusing the gene encoding the catalytic and translocation domains of DT (amino acids 1-388) via a Met-His linker with human IL-3. See, e.g., Frankel et al., “Diphtheria toxin fused to human interleukin-3 is toxic to blasts from patients with myeloid leukemias,” Leukemia 14: 576-585 (2000). DT388IL-3 has been shown to be potently and selectively cytotoxic to IL-3R positive AML cell lines and primary leukemia cells derived from patients. (See, Frankel et al., “Characterization of diphtheria fusion proteins targeted to the human interleukin-3 receptor,” Protein Eng. 13: 575-581 (2000); Alexander et al., “High affinity interleukin-3 receptor expression on blasts from patients with acute myelogenous leukemia correlates with cytotoxicity of a diphtheria toxin/IL-3 fusion protein,” Leuk. Res. 25: 875-881 (2001); Alexander et al. “In vitro interleukin-3 binding to leukemia cells predicts cytotoxicity of a diphtheria toxin/IL-3 fusion protein,” Bioconj. Chem. 11:564-568 (2000); Feuring-Buske et al. “A diphtheria toxin interleukin-3 fusion protein is cytotoxic to primitive acute myeloid leukemia progenitors but spares normal progenitors,” Cancer Res. 62: 1730-1736 (2002)). Additional studies found that high affinity variants of the DT388IL-3 compound, named DT388-IL3[K116W] (based on the mutation of a lysine at amino acid 116 to tryptophan) and DT388IL3[Δ125-133] (based on a deletion of amino acids 125-133 in the IL3 domain), had increased potency against leukemia cells (See, Hogge et al., “Variant diphtheria toxin-interleukin-3 conjugates with increased receptor affinity have enhanced cytotoxicity against acute myeloid leukemia progenitors,” Clin. Cancer Res. 12: 1284-1291 (2006); Testa et al., “Diphtheria toxin fused to variant human interleukin-3 induces cytotoxicity of blasts from patients with acute myeloid leukemia according to the level of interleukin-3 receptor expression,” Blood 106: 2527-2529 (2005)). DT388IL-3 also demonstrated in vivo anti-tumor efficacy in certain mouse models of human leukemia (See, Black et al., “Diphtheria toxin interleukin-3 fusion protein (DT388IL-3) prolongs disease-free survival of leukemic immuno-compromised mice,” Leukemia; 17: 155-159 (2003); Feuring-Buske et al. “A diphtheria toxin-interleukin-3 fusion protein is cytotoxic to primitive acute myeloid leukemia progenitors but spares normal progenitors,” Cancer Res. 62: 1730-1736 (2002); and Hogge et al., “The efficacy of diphtheria-growth factor fusion proteins is enhanced by co-administration of cytosine arabinoside in an immunodeficient mouse model of human acute myeloid leukemia” Leuk Res 28: 1221-1226 (2004)). Safety was shown at therapeutically active doses in rodents and monkeys. (See, Black et al., “Diphtheria toxin interleukin-3 fusion protein (DT388IL-3) prolongs disease-free survival of leukemic immuno-compromised mice,” Leukemia; 17: 155-159 (2003); Cohen et al., “Toxicology and pharmacokinetics of DT388IL-3, a fusion toxin consisting of a truncated diphtheria toxin (DT388) linked to human interleukin-3 (IL-3), in cynomolgus monkeys” Leuk Lymph, 45: 1647-1656 (2004); Cohen et al., “Safety evaluation of DT388IL-3, a diphtheria toxin-interleukin-3 fusion protein, in cynomolgus monkeys,” Cancer Immunol. Immunother. 54: 799-806 (2005)). Clinical batches of DT388IL-3 were prepared and an IND obtained (BB IND #11314). (See, Urieto et al., “Expression and purification of the recombinant diphtheria fusion toxin DT388IL-3 for phase I clinical trials,” Protein Exp. Purif. 33: 123-133 (2004).